Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-20-1993 • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 20, 1993 7:30 P.M. AGENDA SESSION 1. Review Minutes: January 6, 1993 (Enclosed) 2. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit Request by Jim Parker, 7768 Woodlawn Drive, Planning Case No. 359-93 3. Review of Planning Commission Bylaws 4. Review of Comprehensive Plan Update • **************************************************************** APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY CITY HALL AT 784-3055 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. THANK YOU. **************************************************************** • UNAPPROVED PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting January 6, 1993 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 The Mounds View Planning Commission was 1. Call To Order called to order by Chair Mountin at 7:33 p.m. on January 6, 1993 . MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Colleen, 2. Roll Call Miller, Nelson, Peterson, Ruggles, Stevenson, and Chair Mountin. ' ALSO PRESENT: Planner Harrington and Recording Secretary Asleson. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Peterson to 3 . Approval of approve the minutes of December 2, 1992 . Minutes: December 2, • 1992 7 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried There were no resident requests or 4. Resident comments from the floor. Requests and Comments This case was reviewed at the December 2 5. Consideration and December 16, 1992 Planning Comm- of Resolution ission meetings. Planner Harrington No. 355-92, stated—that, applying the most lenient Regarding parking requirements of the code, this Variance site would require 34 parking spaces to Request of operate as a bottle shop. The most Simon T. Simon, recent submittal by the applicant shows 2840 Highway that there is room for 15 spaces. 10, Planning Case No. 358- 2 The applicant, Simon T. Simon, was present. He stated that he had attempt- ed to contact the Highway Department regarding the use of state right-of-way for parking. Thus far, officials at MnDOT have not returned his calls. Commissioner Stevenson asked the • applicant if there were any other • Mounds View Planning Commission January 6, 1993 Regular Meeting Page 3 Motion/Second: Ruggles/Stevenson to approve Resolution No. 355-92, approving the variance request of Simon T. Simon, 2840 Highway 10. Commissioner Nelson asked about the "enforceability" of the statement in the resolution which would allow the City to review the variance upon a change in use of the building. Planner Harrington stated that he had spoken with the City Attorney, who assured him that the City would have the right to review the variance when the use changes. 4 ayes 3 nays Motion Failed This motion failed due to the lack of a 2/3 affirmative majority, as required by Chapter 40 of the Municipal Code. Commissioner Peterson stated that this was a difficult situation, but he felt that he had to vote against the variance because it goes against the Comprehen- sive Plan's goal, of reducing the non- conforming uses on Highway 10. He felt that there is adequate parking for the store now, but that he didn't feel that there would be enough for the proposed use ifthe va-r--ane were granted. Commissioner Miller voted against the variance because she felt that granting a parking reduction variance of over 50% would set a bad precedent for other such situations in the City. Chair Mountin had the following reasons for voting against the variance: • A use currently exists for this property. Denial of the variance will not derive the applicant use of his property. UNAPPROVED 411 Mounds View Planning Commission January 6, 1993 Regular Meeting Page 5 Planner Harrington requested that the individual components of the landscaping plan be incorporated into the appli- cant's remodeling plan, referenced in the proposed resolution as Exhibit 1. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Nelson to approve Resolution No. 356-93, recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit request for a sales and closing office at 7295 Silver Lake Road. 7 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Planner Harrington noted that, due to 7. Staff Report business obligations, Len Burgers had declined reappointment to another Planning Commission term. He also stated that Commissioner Colleen would be reappointed to another term and 411 Council Member Pat Rickaby named as Council liaison to the Commission on January 11, 1993 . Draft copies of the new Comprehensive Plan were distributed to all Commissioners. He asked that the Commissioners read over the document and bring their comments and concerns to the January 20, 1993 Agenda Session. Chair Mountin asked that one of the 8. Reports of Commissioners attend the January 25, Chair and 1993 Council meeting, since there was no Commissioners Council liaison present this Planning Commission meeting. Commissioners Peterson, Stevenson, and Nelson all indicated interest in attending and agreed to make sure that at least one of them was in attendance on the 25th. Commissioner Nelson asked Planner Harrington when Commission would be looking at the sign code. Planner Harrington replied that this would occur after the recodification was complete. MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PAUL HARRINGTON, PLANNERt' DATE: January 14, 1993 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 7768 WOODLAWN DRIVE JIM PARKER, PLANNING CASE NO. 359-93 Jim Parker, 7768 Woodlawn Drive, has made application for a conditional use permit to allow an oversized accessory building on the aforementioned property. Chapter 40. 10 Subdivision D (6) of the Mounds View Municipal Code allows for the construction of accessory buildings exceeding 216 square feet but, not larger than 400 square feet, with the issuance of a conditional use permit. Mr. Parker has made application for a 256 square foot building. Upon inspection of the property, staff discovered that the proposed structure had already been constructed. Additionally, a second accessory structure (approximately 80-100 square feet) on the property was documented. The Municipal Code allows only one 110 accessory structure, other than a garage, per residential property in the City. At present, the applicant has a 20'x 42' detached garage on the parcel. Other than the existence of the second accessory structure, the request meets all applicable requirements of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Approval of the request should be contingent upon the removal of the second accessory building. If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to give me a call. IIIAttachment to the Variance Application: Jim Parker 7768 Woodlawn Dr. N.E. I have lived in MoundsView since 1960 - 32 years . This is the first improvement of this kind we have made. My lot is large - 100 x 300 nearly a fenced acre , which requires power mower, roto tiller, spreader, and all the usual yard and garden equipment and tools . In addition I have a motorcycle and my son who lives at home has one. We also have a ATV, plus several bicycles . Also lawn furniture storage needed in winter. In addition, we wanted to add a few more square feet to accomodate my lapidary hobby; for which I have a slab saw, trim saw, polishing wheels , plus many pounds of uncut rock; my woodworking hobby for which I am accumulating various equipment . Our son living at home is handicapped and needs to have space to delve into his projects . I am approaching retirement age and am hoping to spend many of my free hours in one of these productive hobbies . Also having six children, I am always fixing, making, or modifying something. If not 410 for one of them, any one of the six grandchildren comes up with something that Grandpa needs to fix. We feel the new building is not an eyesore like the old metal building which we hoped to move out. The new building is 5 feet from the fence which is one foot from the property line. Beginning work at 6 : 00 in the morning and working until 5 : 30 does not make it convienent to make application. I also request permission to be heard at the meetings and hearings , if I feel it is necessary. l n Jim Parker —1:) • . . . (-- • 0 . ‹. ‘'''• • Sa. 1 01 r-- -- —73 r- •—............_ I __ _ ._. .._ _ __ — • IA 1 • 1 •I'.1 tilta CiOVi ; -••1° .-1 j‘i • . . "..C..... ..-• . X_ i - 0 • 4) . - I a - a ._ 1 I 1 • ....,‹ A 1J\ i •-t;E . e 0 e, • I-, t, t 1 . -n u i , . _ In I --- . ---1 i 4. 1 I I_ I ! . • --...... I >4.,:" Ca , ..... I • I .---------- rIN th .C;11 I I . • . ->c•• -1*')..3 OA C) ...N. 7"' --L - % i N,, • NI Cm%) . t .. -- ... -1-1 48111//1*41111111111161. ,.- 1 C) -0 7- . Za -11 t tt,11-- - , \ \\ I ‘ * b \y,,, - - 1:1 _1 __ _.. el 0 ., ---A----A----4-- \-, , ss c - T.) G7-- cm • S. -•••••< - - ,71111111 Aar at 5 E • 13 ti• , ‘4. 1 74 i Z• '''k ? E .---.....- .. --.. ..- „.„, 91 ,A -1 P 0 IP . -. , — . 4 7.:' , „.....„..,..„......-.„.,,,,,..3-..4,..!, 4.4Tr---..,.,,—.:4.-.t..-444.11.,..f.- -,!;,:_ 4,•:-• •_.• N . •..11,.-..p.---r•••7 c.i.,..iK..... f.•11,,......:. r. •:*.- . ... • •.-79-1:1,2-iit,-.uriiifi:. . ,...:..,...., ..._:-•-,:,-, ,7, : . r. ..• - - . ti.---- ;1:71.4.:C-'72,7..ro.."41t-t:;',:r. 14/z4f•:;.:t44 ..e, --.-. ::-.:•_. • ---- • . I iiiill. ....'..0!,,,,_....:-.,.....,11-2..a.:4i...4'•';'..;:•.-i:: --.:;..•,?_*:~. . Ilk, _--_,....' ....„.:. 7•;i:• ••,..`:. .••••-•t - • --t " . . - ... .SN -- -- • 1\1 ' :1.4:::;!::;_.::::,-.:4',..: -;•-r-i .'.. . s.....- --, - '-'•---- s' ' ' ..-/-7 : ,.:. -• - - - - : , , , ' • - . , '. -41 ,?„,--,--;:,...:7"___„-:- :.,-,-. ....:_.., ..-- • . . -C . . . • -7C.'-:'.7.-71. 1>atr.tEPLIC÷7,';'•::'.-' l':-' '1'-.'' -'7 . . _ .- .. • 716 - • • :.,,•-. a iifi,g,--4.--,.*,„:„..t.f:.irr..,..:.-:•.:1:::... ,-.,. .. .. •,....,-::-....---;.i.„ 0,...,.1,,:„-: :.--.:•;4.71-74,-:-7.-•1.-:::!:f :- - , •1 • • . vp i'itirk...":14i-•--12.;i::'.;.-ls,.--.1.1114.ie.ik..,..-....1-%yz..,-,:..w.-1::,--,.::.•„;;.-7 . - t.' 97.7-..,--,.r- ...,, . •-.ypi•.„--,-,-...v.,..-.;z!•e:.:-.A ..::ru-,,,..-.::---- .--:. -,- . ...„ • 1 . N , • , _1z MEMORANDUM • TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PAUL HARRINGTON, PLANNER ? DATE: January 14, 1993 SUBJECT: UPDATE OF PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS Attached for your review are the bylaws of the Planning Commission. Chapter 32.05, Subdivision 6 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that the bylaws be reviewed on an annual basis at the first regular meeting of February. Review of the bylaws is taking place at this meeting so that any changes made can be formally acted upon at the February 3 meeting. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. B. The third Wednesday of the month shall be a regular agenda • meeting for the purpose of informational review of applications for planning consideration, drafting of reports, and for other discussion not requiring action (i.e., vote) by the Commission. C. Meetings shall be conducted in accordance with State Open Meet- ing Laws. III. INFORMATIONAL PACKETS. Each commissioner shall receive an informational planning report for the items to be placed on the follow- ing month's regular business meeting agenda no later than the Friday preceding the agenda meeting. Each commissioner is responsible for reviewing the material within the packet prior to the regular agenda meeting. • IV. A1'1'11NDANCE. Commission members shall advise the designated Staff member or chairperson of an anticipated absence from any regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Any member not attending 20 regular scheduled meetings per year without consent of the commission shall be deemed to have vacated his office, and such vacancy shall be filled by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 32.09 of the Municipal Code. A leave of absence may be granted by the consent of the commission. Rev, 10/90 • 2 c) Summary of staff review. d) Summary of statements made by the applicant, particularly concessions or agreements by the applicant. 5. Motion/Second a) The motion shall be quoted as accurately as possi- ble. b) The motion shall be prefaced with supportive statement; i.e., "whereas". 6. The vote on each motion (ayes, nays, and abstentions), a statement of reasons for nay votes or abstentions, and whether motion carries or fails. • 7. Specific concerns addressed to the chairperson for inclu- sion in the minutes. 8. Reports by members. 9. Date, time, place, and attendance at the preceding regu- lar agenda meetings. 10. Motion for adjournment, second, vote, and time. 11. Signature of the Staff designated member. B. All minutes shall be clearly marked to indicate either "APPROVED" or "UNAPPROVED". Each commissioner shall receive a copy of the previous regular business meeting minutes • Rev. 10/90 4. MEMORANDUM • TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PAUL HARRINGTON, PLANNER P`�, DATE: January 14, 1993 SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Please be prepared to discuss and comment on those chapters of the Comprehensive Plan which were distributed at the January 6 Planning Commission meeting. The remaining two (2) chapters will be completed within the next two weeks - at which time I will deliver them to your home addresses. • • CM OF SUND Phone: (612) 784-3055 • EVM Fax: (612) 784-3462 "Quite Simply the Best" January 13, 1993 Dear Planning Commissioner: I wish to invite you to an information meeting to be held at Mounds View City Hall on Thursday, January 28 at 7:00 p.m. This meeting will be reviewing the final report on the Regional Senior Community Center which has been recommended by the RSCC Task Force. I think that this project is of pertinence to the Planning Commission because it would offer services and make the City of Mounds View an joint owner of a Regional Senior Center. You will be interested I am sure on the information related to the Senior Center. The drawings and architecture plans as well as program and service opportunities will be reviewed at the meeting. This is also a unique project because is regional in nature and is a joint venture with four other neighboring cities. This is exactly what the State and Federal Legislatures have been encouraging. The site is just over the Mounds View border on the south side of County Road H across from the Medtronics Corp. in Fridley. This site is very close for Mounds View residents. The site is on Anoka County Park land and is beautiful. The architecture blends in the natural setting. I have enclosed information regarding the RSCC. It is very important that there is a good turnout at the information meeting because this is an important opportunity for the City of Mounds View, one that needs a decision by the City Council. The City Council needs to hear from the public regarding their interest in a joint venture of a Senior Center. . i . ' ' _ . i •. - - - :-eeting. Your opinions and thoughts and questions will be greatly appreciated. We need your input on this issue. If you have any questions regarding this issue or the meeting please call me At 784-3055 ext. 20. I look forward to seeing you at the meeting. Sincerely, Mary Saarion, Director Parks, Recreation and Forestry • PRINTED WITH SOY INK 2401 Highway 10• Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 `I • Informational Meeting for Proposed Senior Community Center This is to serve as a reminder of the informational meeting in Mounds View concerning the proposed senior center. This meeting will be held: THURSDAY, JANUARY 28 7:00 p.m. MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Task Force members will give a presentation followed by a question and answer segment. City councils in the four cities involved in this project will ultimately make the decision to approve or disapprove this project. • Please review the enclosed Question/Answer information. Please advise other Mounds View residents of this meeting as only senior club members and trip activity participants have received this mailing. Also, check your next FOCUS for an insert. If you have questions prior to the meeting, call: Parks and Recreation Director Mary Saarion, 784-3055 Public informational meetings for proposed regional senior community center: 7:00 p.m. January 13 - Fridley City Hall January 14 - New Brighton City Hall January 27 - Spring Lake Park City Hall January 28 - Mounds View City Hall Call 784-3055 for meeting locations. QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ABOUT THE PROPOSED REGIONAL SENIOR CENTER • l. Why should we build a regional senior Center? What programs and services will be provided by a regional senior center? The regional senior center will offer a variety of programs that are designed to meet the needs of seniors. These programs include health and wellness programs, nutrition programs, several forms of counseling, information, and referral programs, legal aid, tax assistance, transportation services, fuel assistance, home maintenance assistance, self-defense and protection programs, coordination of senior volunteer programs, and a wide variety of social and recreation programs. 2. What facilities will be available at the proposed regional senior center? The proposed regional senior center would cost about $2 million and would include 26,657 square feet of space. The facilities available for senior programs would include a large, multi-purpose room, an arts and crafts room, a fitness room, a meeting room, a kitchen, a library/lounge, office space, a game room, storage space, a garage for senior vans, and restroom facilities. 3. Where would the regional senior center by located? The proposed senior center would be located at the Anoka County Rice CreekTrail site on 69th Avenue in Fridley,just east of Old Central and south of Medtronic. 4. How much will the proposed senior center cost to operate? We are estimating that the proposed senior center will cost about $498,000 per year to operate. This includes $186,000 in anticipated debt service for the build' — - -• - .. - . - ; - -alWe - - • : - . from federal grants and other external sources of income. This leaves about $423,000 to be funded by the four cities. 5. How much of the operating costs will be funded by Mounds View. Mounds View's cost is based on its share of general population and senior population. We expect this cost to be about $67,305.00 per year. 6. What is the proposed regional senior center going to cost me in additional taxes? • This depends upon how much of the additional cost the City Council chooses to fund from property taxes. If the entire amount is levied, it would cost the owner of an $83,000 house (average cost of a MoundsView home) about $15.00 per year in additional taxes. 7. How will the proposed regional senior center be governed? . The senior center task force is proposing that the four cities establish a thir- teen member joint powers authority. It would include representation from all four communities, as well as senior representation. 8. When would the proposed senior center be built? If the four city councils approve the senior center concept in early 1993,the senior center could be ready for operation in early 1994. 9. Will there be a referendum on the senior center issue? There could be a referendum in those communities that would need to issue bonds to cover their share of construction costs. If, however, communities use existing resources to cover construction costs, a referendum is unnecessary and may not be legal. In any event,there will be many opportunities for individuals to voice their opinions at the public hearing processes that are scheduled for the four city councils. Whether or not there is a referendum will ultimately be up to each of the four city councils. 10. What will happen if the regional senior center is not approved in each of the four cities? • It is difficult to tell. One thing is fairly certain; the project will need the support of the two larger cities (Fridley and New Brighton) in order to be financially feasible. Even under these circumstances,financial feasibility is less than guaranteed. I 1. What are the advantages of a regional senior center over individual senior centers for each community? In general,the overall advantage is that a regional senior center will allow economies to scale in the delivery of senior services that are not available in each of the individual cities. One thing is certain, our senior population is growing. There is also a growing variety of needs for those seniors, including the needs for nutritional programs, health screening, transportation, and home maintenance assistance. A regional approach to providing for senior needs avoids duplication of facilities, manpower, and equipment. It also allows for the pooling of resources for the facility, staffing and programming. If resources are pooled, there is better opportunity for optimizing the use of these resources. • Finally,one can argue that the regional approach is providing senior services is very much in keeping with the current trend toward consolidation of govern- ment units. 12. Will there be a transportation system to accommodate the older adults in the region wishing to attend programs and services at the • senior center? Yes,we will have two vans and a bus that will be available to provide transport- ation to and from the senior center. We will investigate the best access via public transportation and work with the MTC to provide convenient services to the center. 13. Will there be senior dining and if so,will it be prepared on-site? We are planning on having a senior dining program at the regional site. As to the details, such as on-site preparations, we will work with all appropriate parties to secure the best possible solutions. 14. Will the two Mounds View Senior Clubs continue meeting at their present locations? Yes, if that is their choice. Sunrise Church and Messiah Church have always made the two senior clubs feel welcome. • 15. What about all other existingprograms that use communityspace? P g P The same holds true for all other groups. If current facilities are adequate and the participants wish to remain where they are, they can make that choice.